Do We Really Need to Respect Religions? - Think Atheist2015-03-31T21:27:14Zhttp://www.thinkatheist.com/forum/topics/do-we-really-need-to-respect-religions?commentId=1982180%3AComment%3A1211670&feed=yes&xn_auth=nono, they dont respect us why…tag:www.thinkatheist.com,2012-11-26:1982180:Comment:12171012012-11-26T15:33:40.431ZTiffany Willoughbyhttp://www.thinkatheist.com/profile/TiffanyWilloughby
<p>no, they dont respect us why should we respect them?</p>
<p>no, they dont respect us why should we respect them?</p> One thing I give Catholicism…tag:www.thinkatheist.com,2012-11-20:1982180:Comment:12144122012-11-20T21:31:33.066ZT A Ahttp://www.thinkatheist.com/profile/TAA
<p>One thing I give Catholicism over any form of Protestantism is that they are not into a litteral teaching of the bible. My elementary school teachers in the early 70s were nuns, yet religion was never opposed to science, scientific facts were a given. Of course we had to write essays on how greath that bitch M.Theresa was, vomit, I don't know why I aced those classes... sigh. I was never not an atheist, and I got along very poorly with those nuns, they left some pretty severe scars on my…</p>
<p>One thing I give Catholicism over any form of Protestantism is that they are not into a litteral teaching of the bible. My elementary school teachers in the early 70s were nuns, yet religion was never opposed to science, scientific facts were a given. Of course we had to write essays on how greath that bitch M.Theresa was, vomit, I don't know why I aced those classes... sigh. I was never not an atheist, and I got along very poorly with those nuns, they left some pretty severe scars on my psyche nevertheless.</p> Um... Bill Gates was NEVER St…tag:www.thinkatheist.com,2012-11-20:1982180:Comment:12139832012-11-20T19:18:44.488ZTaranachhttp://www.thinkatheist.com/profile/Taranach
<p>Um... Bill Gates was NEVER Steve Jobs "Gopher".. they were contemporaries true enough and Jobs had wanted to buy some of Gates programs but Gates refused the offer and went to IBM for more money. Also remember that Windows came first, before the Mac and BOTH were based on Sun's PARC work on GUI's. I started on a PDP-11 and programming punch cards and have followed the tech all throughout. </p>
<p>The Mac has always been more "arts" related, being initially much stronger with graphics and…</p>
<p>Um... Bill Gates was NEVER Steve Jobs "Gopher".. they were contemporaries true enough and Jobs had wanted to buy some of Gates programs but Gates refused the offer and went to IBM for more money. Also remember that Windows came first, before the Mac and BOTH were based on Sun's PARC work on GUI's. I started on a PDP-11 and programming punch cards and have followed the tech all throughout. </p>
<p>The Mac has always been more "arts" related, being initially much stronger with graphics and sound, whereas the PC was directed towards business concerns. They have become essentially equivalent with preferences based mostly on personal taste. I have owned, built or used computers from Altair, Kaypro, Commodore, Radio Shack, Compaq, Apple and IBM,</p>
<p>If you want something easy to use and functional that you don't have to worry about too much, pay a little extra for the convenience and get a Mac. If you want something with the widest variety of options and uses, Get a PC base and a la carte the rest that you need. Yes it can take a little more work and a little more knowledge but you can mold it into what you really want and/or need, not what one company decides you want.</p>
<p>Neither is truly superior, each is just more suited to their users.</p>
<p>Thanks on the avatar, that is my personal 'heraldry' that I designed for use in the SCA</p> @G - ya, so you accuse me of…tag:www.thinkatheist.com,2012-11-20:1982180:Comment:12140012012-11-20T04:12:22.532ZDienekeshttp://www.thinkatheist.com/profile/KeithPinster
<p>@G - ya, so you accuse me of running away from an "honest debate" while puking insults like "So you go all shrill..." and resort to name calling, and you call ME the irrational one? You can't even associate quotes properly. Too funny. Xian trolls like you are so amusing. LOL </p>
<p>@G - ya, so you accuse me of running away from an "honest debate" while puking insults like "So you go all shrill..." and resort to name calling, and you call ME the irrational one? You can't even associate quotes properly. Too funny. Xian trolls like you are so amusing. LOL </p> @Gallup's Mirror - "In other…tag:www.thinkatheist.com,2012-11-20:1982180:Comment:12138242012-11-20T03:17:01.805ZDienekeshttp://www.thinkatheist.com/profile/KeithPinster
<p>@Gallup's Mirror - "In other words: your position is too weak to withstand an intellectually honest debate"</p>
<p>Actually, no. It was just clear to me that you are closed minded and are one of those people that jump to conclusions and use arbitrary lines in the sand to take a stance to justify what you want to be true. You admit that you have no idea when consciousness develops ("We don't know when fetal consciousness begins"), don't know anything about the circumstances around these…</p>
<p>@Gallup's Mirror - "In other words: your position is too weak to withstand an intellectually honest debate"</p>
<p>Actually, no. It was just clear to me that you are closed minded and are one of those people that jump to conclusions and use arbitrary lines in the sand to take a stance to justify what you want to be true. You admit that you have no idea when consciousness develops ("We don't know when fetal consciousness begins"), don't know anything about the circumstances around these very few abortions ("I can't tell you how many of the 8028 abortions performed after 21 weeks in 2008 were justifiable"), and believe in over-bearing, over-reaching government ("government bureaucrats (and Democrats too) are involved in every legal issue, from jaywalking to homicide. That goes whether abortion is completely unrestricted or banned outright."). </p>
<p>You also seem to produce contradictory statements (e.g. that last statement: "government bureaucrats ... are involved in every legal issue, ... [even when] ... completely unrestricted". How would bureaucrats be involved in something that is completely unrestricted?).</p>
<p>My stance is pretty straight forward:</p>
<p>* To me, the OBVIOUS line in the stand is birth. No one at all can ague that a person becomes their own after that point. </p>
<p>* Second, as I said, I prefer to err on the side of freedom and liberty rather than slavery. Forcing a woman to carry a baby to the point of death for both her and the baby, to me is one of the very definitions of evil.</p>
<p>* You are correct in that I don't have any empirical evidence to suggest that most of the women having late-term abortions are doing so based on heath reasons. However, LOGIC is definitely on my side here. Like I said, I just don't believe that a woman would carry a baby into her third trimester (let alone her second trimester), only to abort it for no better reason than on a whim. As I said, to think that they would for no valid reason is basically saying that you think that women are too pathetically stupid to make their own decisions. It is saying that women can never be trusted to make their own decisions, relegating them to slavery of their own bodies and the men that make their decisions for them.</p>
<p>My concession is simply the recognition that you and I have what appears to be contradictory political philosophies and I don't see a way for us to come to a consensus. My posts always include the concept of freedom and allowing adults to make their own decisions whereas your posts never address liberty, but rather seem to support fascist governmental control over people's lives based on your personal moral path and ignoring every else's that contradict it. We seem to have such diametrically opposed viewpoints on how people should be treated, that I don't really see how a conversation between us could be constructive.</p> Me: Medical science shows fet…tag:www.thinkatheist.com,2012-11-20:1982180:Comment:12137422012-11-20T03:03:50.089ZGallup's Mirrorhttp://www.thinkatheist.com/profile/GallupsMirror
<p><strong>Me:</strong> Medical science shows fetal consciousness begins sometime after 24 weeks. <br></br><strong>Crackpot:</strong> That's slavery!!! You're enslaving women!!!<br></br><strong>Me:</strong> We really should roll back these arbitrary state limitations on abortions.<br></br><strong>Crackpot:</strong> A self-righteous prick will kill your family!!!<br></br><strong>Me:</strong> It would be better to base abortion-related legislation on reality, science, and reason.<br></br><strong>Crackpot:…</strong></p>
<p><strong>Me:</strong> Medical science shows fetal consciousness begins sometime after 24 weeks. <br/><strong>Crackpot:</strong> That's slavery!!! You're enslaving women!!!<br/><strong>Me:</strong> We really should roll back these arbitrary state limitations on abortions.<br/><strong>Crackpot:</strong> A self-righteous prick will kill your family!!!<br/><strong>Me:</strong> It would be better to base abortion-related legislation on reality, science, and reason.<br/><strong>Crackpot:</strong> See what happens when you ban all abortions!!!</p>
<p>Priceless, Keith. Absolutely priceless. Have a great night. ;)</p>
<p></p> Yeah, I knew X was Unix, but…tag:www.thinkatheist.com,2012-11-20:1982180:Comment:12139062012-11-20T02:28:06.482Zarchaeopteryxhttp://www.thinkatheist.com/xn/detail/u_2gskiyna07rt3
<p>Yeah, I knew X was Unix, but I wasn't aware of all of the particulars. Frankly, though X has a more polished look, I could do more with OS 9 and lower, than with X, and in fact, don't have a MacBook, but rather an iBook G4, which allows me to partition and run both X and 9, otherwise, I'd have had to replace a couple of thousand dollars worth of software that will run on 9, but not on X.</p>
<p>Yeah, I knew X was Unix, but I wasn't aware of all of the particulars. Frankly, though X has a more polished look, I could do more with OS 9 and lower, than with X, and in fact, don't have a MacBook, but rather an iBook G4, which allows me to partition and run both X and 9, otherwise, I'd have had to replace a couple of thousand dollars worth of software that will run on 9, but not on X.</p> http://www.upworthy.com/dear-…tag:www.thinkatheist.com,2012-11-20:1982180:Comment:12137362012-11-20T02:24:51.760ZDienekeshttp://www.thinkatheist.com/profile/KeithPinster
<p><a href="http://www.upworthy.com/dear-america-this-is-what-happens-when-you-ban-all-abortions-sincerely-ireland?c=upw4" target="_blank">http://www.upworthy.com/dear-america-this-is-what-happens-when-you-ban-all-abortions-sincerely-ireland?c=upw4</a></p>
<p></p>
<p><a href="http://www.upworthy.com/dear-america-this-is-what-happens-when-you-ban-all-abortions-sincerely-ireland?c=upw4" target="_blank">http://www.upworthy.com/dear-america-this-is-what-happens-when-you-ban-all-abortions-sincerely-ireland?c=upw4</a></p>
<p></p> @Taranach - "... I also must…tag:www.thinkatheist.com,2012-11-20:1982180:Comment:12136882012-11-20T02:21:31.823ZDienekeshttp://www.thinkatheist.com/profile/KeithPinster
<p>@Taranach - "... I also must say that we should "appear" (key word there) logical, rational and respectful..."</p>
<p>I couldn't agree more, Taranach. I believe that it's almost impossible to convert a theist (most especially if they are being irrational) during an online conversation. I believe that the conversations that we have are really more for the audience than for the participants. I've seen a lot of posts from people who say that they have researched atheism and they have been…</p>
<p>@Taranach - "... I also must say that we should "appear" (key word there) logical, rational and respectful..."</p>
<p>I couldn't agree more, Taranach. I believe that it's almost impossible to convert a theist (most especially if they are being irrational) during an online conversation. I believe that the conversations that we have are really more for the audience than for the participants. I've seen a lot of posts from people who say that they have researched atheism and they have been convinced to rational thought based on the conversations that they have seen. I think it's very important to stay on subject, don't let the other side drag you into emotionally based arguments (you will NEVER win an emotionally based argument with a theist - that's where they live) and sticking to dealing with the actual subject and not being drawn into straw-man arguments shows our audience that we promote (by example) rational, reasonable thinking.</p>
<p>I've VERY sorry to hear about your situation. I know how frustrating it is when people use the system to attack with no validity at all. I, personally, just spent 5 years and about $70k keeping the local sheriff's office from railroading me for actually *helping* someone who was about to be kicked out on the street and lose everything he had, believe it or not, by the very county that attacked me! As far as I know, there was no religiosity involved, but they were still being just as self-righteous and malicious. I hope you are in a much better place now! :)</p> @Arch
Apple didn't create OS…tag:www.thinkatheist.com,2012-11-20:1982180:Comment:12137292012-11-20T01:49:02.197ZGallup's Mirrorhttp://www.thinkatheist.com/profile/GallupsMirror
<p>@Arch</p>
<p>Apple didn't create OS X. They just added the lipstick. Before it was renamed OS X, it was just a flavor of BSD Unix, which lives on today as <a href="http://www.pcbsd.org/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">PC-BSD</a>, <a href="http://www5.us.freebsd.org/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Free BSD</a>, and <a href="http://www.netbsd.org/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Net BSD</a>. </p>
<p>OS X is free open source Unix, made proprietary by being pegged to ex$pen$ive Mac hardware.…</p>
<p>@Arch</p>
<p>Apple didn't create OS X. They just added the lipstick. Before it was renamed OS X, it was just a flavor of BSD Unix, which lives on today as <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.pcbsd.org/" target="_blank">PC-BSD</a>, <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www5.us.freebsd.org/" target="_blank">Free BSD</a>, and <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.netbsd.org/" target="_blank">Net BSD</a>. </p>
<p>OS X is free open source Unix, made proprietary by being pegged to ex$pen$ive Mac hardware. You're a 'nix user, but unlike the rest of the Unix/Linux community, you paid big bucks, OS X Unix doesn't work on cheap PC hardware, you can't modify (or even look at) the source code, and Apple manipulates their APIs and DRM to ensure a never-ending cycle of vendor lock-in. You don't use Apple. <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.defectivebydesign.org/apple" target="_blank">Apple uses you</a>.</p>
<p>I still shake my head when I see people using a <a rel="nofollow" href="http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MC976LL/A" target="_blank">$2800 MacBook</a> with that giant, white, Apple light-bulb on the lid. They're attractive to the eye but what a lousy value for what you get.</p>
<p><a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://dilbert.com/dyn/str_strip/000000000/00000000/0000000/000000/20000/1000/000/21021/21021.strip.gif"><img class="align-center" src="http://dilbert.com/dyn/str_strip/000000000/00000000/0000000/000000/20000/1000/000/21021/21021.strip.gif" height="103" width="341"/></a></p>